Chicken/egg. NVidia tooling is lacking surely in part because the hardware wasn’t usable on macOS until now. Now that it’s usable that might change.

Nvidia GPUs were usable on Intel Macs, but compatibility got worse over time, and Apple stopped making a Mac Pro with regular PCIe slots in 2013. People then got hopeful about eGPUs, but they have their own caveats on top of macOS only fully working with AMD cards. So I've gotten numb to any news about Mac + GPU. The answer was always to just get a non-Apple PC with PCIe slots instead of giving yourself hoops to jump through.

The 2019 Intel Mac Pro had PCIe slots. The Apple Silicon Mac Pro still has them as well, but they’re pretty much useless.

The eGPU "thing" should work on anything that supports thunderbolt as it has native support for pcie.

The point is that if nvidia cared about Mac platform they would have done something to make eGPU usable on Mac a long time ago.

Even on Intel Macs using eGPU with nvidia cards was near impossible. nvidia just doesn't care about it after the breakdown of the two companies' relationship.

Whether a third party has created a signed driver or not doesn't matter much until there is more interest from the GPU maker. This barely moves the needle.

Nvidia tooling like CUDA has worked on AArch64 UNIX-certified OSes since June of 2020: https://download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-aarch64/

The software stack has been ready for Apple Silicon for more than a half decade.

But Apple’s share of the desktop/laptop market is very different than their share of the mobile one.

Yes, however the parent's claim was that Apple does not have a monopoly in any market they're in which is legally demonstrably false.

Stop using AI to “write” slop. It’s immediately obvious from the kicker of the article. Save us all some time and just post the bullet points you gave to an LLM.

You're right, I do use AI to help with the writing. English isn't my first language (I'm native Spanish speaker) and I use it to translate and polish my text. I wouldn't be able to participate here otherwise.

The site runs in 4 languages (English, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian) and covers 261 countries. Back in 2011 we relied on the machine translators available at the time, you probably remember how rough those were for the end user. AI finally lets us produce content that people can actually read in their language without those painful translation artifacts.

I apologize if that's off-putting, but the alternative would be less content for fewer people, or content full of bad translations.

> Ignoring a law is different from knowingly and intentionally breaking the law

This is something Airbnb has facilitated for a very long time, no? And Uber, back when it started.

From a legal perspective I don’t see that it matters whether you’re trying to change the law or not. You’re either following it or breaking it.

Sure. Technically and legally, you’re right.

In reality, it makes quite a difference if public opinion is on your side or not.

“We decided to commit fraud by providing fake compliance reports” reads very differently from “we let homeowners make money by renting a room”

The difference is that Airbnb customers used Airbnb because they thought hotel regulations were dumb and overbearing (or at least, they didn't care about the laws). Delve customers were literally trying to obey the law and Delve (allegedly) lied to them about it.

I wonder if this is what Bezos had in mind when he doubled down on support for Trump.

The way the richest people in the US have sucked up to Trump is shameful.

I disagree, I think the $100k fee was a deliberate move to make sure the yearly allocation is only available to large companies like Oracle and out of reach of smaller startups.

Despite the rhetoric the administration is very friendly to big business and will absolutely help them hire cheaply. Larry Ellison especially.

Nor did you even write this comment yourself

Mea culpa - I definitely failed the “how to post well” test

"Don't post generated comments or AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> Their order book continues to be full.

In 2024 66% of their launches were for Starlink. So it’s not quite correct to suggest there’s a vibrant external market for their product, a lot of it is sort of self dealing.

Starlink is incredibly profitable though.

It's not like they're subsidizing some experimental internal project. Starlink is the majority of their profits and growing fast.

> it’s not quite correct to suggest there’s a vibrant external market for their product

There is a very large demand for launch services. SpaceX balances launching customers and launching Starlink. It's not like they give every launch slot to customers and then launches Starlink whenever there's an opening they couldn't fill.

There's a vibrant external market for satellite Internet service.

This is missing the point of their valuation. SpaceX will internally use their launch capabilities to build industries that no one else can. Starlink is already their main revenue stream. Starship will open up new realms of possibilities.

> I don’t know why anyone would want to invest in OpenAI on the open market

I can only assume hype. That’s why Sam Altman has the job he has. You don’t see the CEO of Anthropic going on the Tonight Show. He’s there to bring OpenAI to the forefront of people’s minds, and uninformed investors will follow.

All catches up to you eventually though.

Hasn't seemed to catch up with Tesla, which is still highly valued despite making a pretty mediocre car compared to the competition. Even if one makes the argument that Tesla vehicles are of good quality, it's still a high valuation that seems to show no sign of dropping.

And probably unsustainable. OpenAI desperately needs to catch up so they’ll throw yet more cash at it, while Anthropic are market leaders in this particular space.

It probably is unsustainable, but until they change it I'm sticking with Codex.

I suspect GPT-5 models are sparser and/or smaller than Opus which is why they can afford to give away so much usage.